MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3199717983 · doi:10.1002/adem.202100800

In Silico Evaluation of Bilinear Elastoplastic Coronary Artery Stents

2021· article· en· W3199717983 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvanced Engineering Materials · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElasticity and Material Modeling
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStentMaterials scienceBiomedical engineeringRadiologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mechanical responses of the endovascular stent determine the arterial homeostasis and vulnerability of the atherosclerotic plaque. Given the various plaque components when the stent is deployed, the stent may apply excessive stress to the lesion and cause plaque rupture. Herein, using the interaction between the Palmaz–Schatz stent with two stent biomaterials, stainless steel, and magnesium alloy, and three different types of plaque, namely hypocellular, hypercellular, and calcified, are studied. An implicit finite element method is used to simulate and analyze the stress and strain acting on the stents, artery, and plaques. The Mooney–Rivlin hyperelastic material model is considered to study the responses of each component. The results reveal that stainless‐steel stents applied a higher level of stress to the plaques and vessel wall, which may lead to vascular damage and plaque rupture. However, a magnesium alloy stent with the similar design and geometrical parameters generates less stress on the plaque and artery. Interestingly, a minor improvement in magnesium alloy stents, increasing the strut thickness, can enhance the stent performance and lower the applied stresses to the vasculature and plaque, making them an ideal choice of material for stenting applications.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.346
Threshold uncertainty score0.803

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.213 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it